The State of Our Waters Sac Watershed

The Missouri Department of Natural Resources seeks to improve the availability of water resource information to communities where impact to these water resources is felt most. The information presented in this summary is intended to increase awareness of how activities on land and in water have an influence on water resource quality and quantity. The department greatly values local input and engagement regarding the mission of ensuring safe and ample water resources, and will continue to seek local guidance to further focus department efforts and funding strategies for the betterment of Our Missouri Waters.

HUC-8: 10290106 September 2015

Sac River Watershed The State of Our Missouri Waters

Key Points In the northern portion of the watershed, low dissolved oxygen levels in water bodies often Importance of cause negative impacts to aquatic life and create challenges for the watershed. These low dis- Water Quantity solved oxygen levels are often a result of excess organic materials, which consume oxygen, and may be discharged from wastewater treatment system types less effective in removing and Quality organics. Other sources of excess organics in water bodies may include excess animal waste, excess nutrient loads (fertilizer) and excess sedimentation from stream bank and erosion. Water shortages can have severe and expensive In the southern portion of the watershed, there are challenges regarding bacteria levels in wa- consequences. Adequate ter bodies, which can cause serious public health and recreational safety issues. Nonpoint water supplies are vital not sources of contamination, such as animal waste and contaminants carried by stormwater run- only to human health and off, can have a serious cumulative impact on surface waters in a largely rural watershed. How- safety, but also to the ever, agricultural best management practices can significantly reduce nonpoint source im- prosperity of our state. pacts. Pollution prevention is also critical due to connectivity of surface water and groundwa- Whether it is for crop irri- ter. Point and nonpoint sources of pollution to water bodies or in and around karst features, gation, industrial manufac- such as sinkholes, can lead to regional contamination of groundwater wells and springs. turing or power genera- tion, water is at the core of Groundwater quantity is also important to consider as groundwater levels in the predominant human existence and sus- aquifer of the area, the Ozark aquifer, are declining in some areas of high use. Water conser- tainability. A few decades vation efforts by groundwater and surface water users can be implemented to help mitigate ago, the supply of water in impacts of increasing water needs in the area. Missouri shares water resources with many oth- Missouri was considered er states, some of which regulate water use and have already established their demand for virtually unlimited. As pop- water. It is important for Missouri to document its need for water and to protect our right to that ulation and industry have water. Registering major water use, annually, establishes a users need for water and helps the increased, a need for department understand the water needs of Missouri citizens. statewide water planning has emerged. Opportunities Water quality impairments Community Involvement can also have severe im- • Through education, advocacy and hands-on projects, communities, groups and individuals pacts on human health can be involved in and promote watershed improvement activities. Some examples include, and the environment and watershed education for schools, litter control, tree planting, water quality monitoring and be extremely expensive. storm drain stenciling. Unfortunately and more Education and Outreach importantly, many water • Technical assistance providers are available for training and assistance regarding several quality impairments are topics such as source water protection, municipal drinking water loss, water main leak detec- only discovered once the tion, asset management, water conservation planning and implementation, and I/I (inflow consequences of poor wa- and infiltration) reduction. ter quality have been real- • Training is also available to livestock operations and landowners regarding the benefits of ized. For this reason, it is alternate watering sources for livestock, improvements to land application practices, best important that locals are management practices and associated cost-share programs. involved in the protection Financial Assistance of their water quality and • Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds are available to build or improve quantity so as to prevent municipal wastewater and drinking water infrastructure and support agricultural and urban irreversible consequences. projects such as improvements to urban runoff, wet weather flow, stormwater and sewer overflow issues, water reuse and conservation and alternative treatment projects. • 319 Nonpoint Source Funds are available to assist organizations with implementation of on -the-ground practices that control, reduce or manage nonpoint source pollution such as ri- parian buffer strips, detention ponds, limitation of animal waste to stream and sinkholes. • Source Water Protection Grants and Well Plugging Grants are available to public water systems to support safe well abandonment procedures and source water protection imple- mentation and planning efforts. • A full list of department funding sources is available at http://dnr.mo.gov/financial.htm

2 Watershed The State of Our Missouri Waters—Background

Geology/Hydrology Carbonate bedrock and associated karst to- pography (including abundant losing streams What is a and sink areas) in the southern half of the ba- sin make pollution prevention measures a pri- Watershed? ority. Within the basin, stream types transition A watershed is an area of from typical clear, gravel bottom streams of land defined by ridges, the Ozark highlands to silt and sand bottomed from which waters flow into prairie type streams more typical of the Osage a particular lake, river or Plains. Relatively low potential for surface to wetland. groundwater contamination exists in the north- Sac River Basin ern reaches of the basin due to the restrictive permeability of bedrock. Characteristics • Drainage area of 1,981 mi 2 Land Use • Includes portions of 10 Few changes in land use have occurred from counties 2001 to 2011. This change comprised less • Part of the than a 1 percent difference overall, while there system was an increase of 0.1 percent of impervious surface area. As this watershed is largely ru- • Largest population cen- ral, nonpoint source contributors are relevant ters in the watershed to the overall health of the watershed. The City consist of the cities of of Springfield and the surrounding urban areas Springfield, Republic, have a significant influence on stream condi- Bolivar, and Willard tions in the watershed due to their proximity to • Polk and Greene coun- the headwaters of the Sac River. ties have experienced approximately 15 per- Water Resources cent population growth SURFACE WATER from 2006 to 2010 There are 2,633 miles of streams and 74,892 Recreational acres of lake in the watershed. Some of the larger streams are Bear Creek, Cedar Creek, Resources Clear Creek, Horse Creek, Little Sac River, received Sac River, South Dry Sac River, and Turn- approximately 300,000 back Creek. The Sac and Little Sac visitors in 2013, while the make up the main arms of Stockton Lake, the Nathaniel Boone Home- largest lake in the watershed. stead State Historic Site received approximately GROUNDWATER 10,000 visitors. These The most widely used and important ground- parks and attractions gen- water supply source in this region is the erate revenue for area Ozark aquifer, part of the Springfield Plateau businesses, support local groundwater province. The aquifer ranges in jobs, and bring in state and thickness from as little as 600-800 feet local tax dollars. (northwest Barton and parts of St. Clair Coun- ty) to 1,600 feet (Stone and Barry Counties). The average thickness is 1,200 feet. SPRINGS There are 303 springs located in the water- shed. Some of the larger springs include: Cave, Clear Creek Park, Cowpatty, Fulbright, Ritter, Hoffmeister, Rathbone, and Sanders. Flow at the springs range from 0.0033 to 7.695 million gallons per day. 3 Sac River Watershed The State of Our Missouri Waters—Current Conditions and Trends

Climate and Water Availability Precipitation The adjacent figure shows annual aver- Estimated Annual Major age statewide precipitation in Missouri Water Use by Category from 1895 to 2013. A 5-year trend line (2013) reveals several wet periods have dominat- ed since the early 1980s, and this wet pattern has also been accompanied by an Electrical Livestock (0.4%) (0.5%) increasing trend of heavy precipitation Industrial Irrigaon Wildlife events. Severe drought occurred during (0.3%) (2.6%) (2.6%) 2012, but this drought was brief compared Recreaon Commercial (0.2%) to major multi-year droughts that occurred (1.1%) in the 1930’s and 1950’s. Tree ring anal- yses conducted in Missouri and historic observation data show periods of multi- year severe droughts in Missouri’s history, indicating that extended dry periods are likely to occur in the future . Municipal (92.2%) Groundwater & Stream Monitoring There are six groundwater monitoring wells within the watershed as part of the Missouri Observation Well Network. Groundwater lev- els fluctuate several feet throughout the year, with groundwater lows typically occurring in winter and highs occurring in late spring. There are currently nine stream gauges in the watershed. Downstream of Stockton Lake on the Sac River near Caplinger Mills, average stream flow is 538 MGD (millions of gallons per day).

Estimated Annual Major Major Water Use Characteristics Data source: National Water System Information, USGS.gov Water Use by Source A major water user is defined as the capacity ( 2 0 1 3 ) to withdraw more than 70 GPM (gallons per Major Water Use Trends in Sac River Basin minute) or 100,000 GPD (gallons per day). (1996-2013) The reported estimated annual water use as Groundwater of 2013 is 8.1 billion gallons, of which 83% is 25.00 17% diverted surface water and 17% is ground- Total (Billion Gallons) 20.00 water. Thirty major water users are regis- Surface Water tered in the basin. The majority of water di- Groundwater 15.00 Surface Water verted is used for municipal drinking water 83% (92.2%). 10.00

There are 110 public drinking water systems 5.00 serving approximately 235,701 people. Wa-

ters systems that are required to report to 0.00 the department show that approximately 35 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 million gallons of water are consumed per day. There is 82.5 million gallons of availa- ble drinking water capacity per day for public water use. 4 Sac River Watershed The State of Our Missouri Waters—Current Conditions and Trends

Watershed Protection Water Quality Impairments DNR Protection Section 303(d) of the federal Clean Wa- ter Act requires each state identify wa- DNR exercises authority ters that do not meet water quality under Missouri’s Clean Wa- standards and for which adequate wa- ter Law to regulate point ter pollution controls are not in place. sources of pollution. When These identified waters are considered point sources are known or impaired. Water quality standards pro- discovered, the department tect beneficial uses of water such as issues permits for these whole body contact (e.g. swimming), sources to limit the amount maintaining fish and other aquatic life, of certain water contami- and providing drinking water for people, nants that may be dis- livestock and wildlife. charged into the water body. The following lake and streams within the watershed are listed on the state’s DNR also has resources to 2012 list of impaired waterways and are help people proactively plan presented on the adjacent map: Turn- to protect water resources, back Creek (E. coli), Tributary to Goose such as: Creek (E. coli), Horse Creek (aquatic • Section 319 funding for macroinvertebrate assessment), Cedar watershed planning and Creek (aquatic macroinvertebrate as- projects sessment), Panther Creek (dissolved • Funding to plan for oxygen), Brush Creek (dissolved oxy- Source Water Protection gen) and Fellows Lake (atmospheric • Soil and Water Conserva- deposition of mercury). tion funding Impairments can be caused by known • State Revolving Fund sources like point or nonpoint source grants and loans for pollution, or may be unknown; however, community drinking water identifying activities near impaired wa- and wastewater improve- ter bodies can provide key information in determining the sources of contamination as well as ments developing solutions for impaired waters. A full list of department Examples of point sources of pollution include municipal wastewater treatment plants, land funding sources is available disturbance sites, large confined animal operations, and treated industrial wastewater discharg- at dnr.mo.gov/financial.htm es. Common challenges for wastewater treatment include the limited contaminant removal ca- pacity of certain types of treatment. When facilities experiences difficulty in providing the proper level of treatment and contaminant removal, the department often works with them to improve the treatment process and quality of the discharge. In the case that point source emitters are unwilling to improve the quality of their discharge, the department has regulatory authority to ensure that inappropriate discharges are discontinued in a timely manner. Nonpoint pollution sources refer to contaminants that do not come from specific conveyances and may come from multiple sources, such as failing septic systems and contaminants carried in stormwater runoff from rural, urban, and agriculture lands. Other causes of water body impair- ments include natural causes like precipitation, climate, and drought which can alter stream flow and channel characteristics leading to changes in water quality.

5 Sac River Watershed The State of Our Missouri Waters—Current Conditions and Trends

Watershed Protection Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) A TMDL is the mathematical calculation of the amount of a specific pollutant that a water body General Water can absorb and still meet water quality standards. A TMDL study identifies the potential or sus- Quality Criteria pected pollutant sources in the water and allocates the allowable pollutant load among these A water body is considered sources. It also includes an implementation plan to identify how the load will be reduced to a impaired if it does not level that will protect water quality. In this watershed, TMDL’s have been developed for the meet water quality stand- Little Sac River and McDaniel Lake, which include pollutant reduction recommendations for ards that specifically pro- fecal coliform and algae, respectively. Stockton Branch also has a permit-in-lieu-of-TMDL, tect its beneficial uses, which requires reduction of the pollutant (organic sediment) through NPDES permit limits. Im- such as drinking water, paired uses for these TMDL’s include whole body contact, drinking water and protection of recreational uses and fish warm water aquatic life. The department has developed pollutant reduction recommendations or other aquatic life health. and measures for all TMDLs, aside from the permit-in-lieu-of-TMDL which has an enforceable requirement. These recommendations are plans, for which actions still can and need to be Missouri’s Process taken to protect, preserve and enhance these watersheds. to Improve For more information regarding these TMDLs, please visit the links provided: Little Sac River TMDL : http://www.dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/tmdl/1381-l-sac-r-record.htm Water Quality McDaniel Lake TMDL: http://www.dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/tmdl/7236-mcdaniel-lk-record.htm Stockton Branch Permit-in-lieu-of-TMDL: http://www.dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/tmdl/1361- stockton-br-record.htm Regulated Point Sources The department regulates point sources by issuing permits that prescribe conditions of operat- ing the point discharge and limit the discharge of water contaminants. In addition, the depart- ment inspects regulated facilities and analyzes water samples to ensure the facilities are not polluting waters. It’s also important that communities look to the future for wa- tershed planning in order to maintain awareness of wastewater treatment types, their impacts and upcoming reg- ulations. The following graphics illustrate the type and distribution of permitted sites in the Sac River Watershed.

NPDES:

National Pollutant Dis- charge Elimination Sys- NPDES Permit Types tem. In Missouri, NPDES permits are also known 40% as Missouri State Oper- ating (MSOP) permits. 29% 19%

6% 2% 4% Land Disturbance Industrial Stormwater Municipal Stormwater Animal Feeding Operations Wastewater Other Types

6 Sac River Watershed The State of Our Missouri Waters—Current Conditions and Trends

Local Watershed Improvements Missouri Stream Team and Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring LOCAL INVOLVEMENT AND Missouri Stream Teams strive to gain and share knowledge regarding the state’s stream sys- OUR WATER: tems and the problems and opportunities they face. The Missouri Stream Team Program is a Is it safe to fish or swim in the near- partnership between the departments of Natural Resources and Conservation as well as the by stream? Does the stream provide Conservation Federation of Missouri and the citizens of Missouri. Besides improving stream habitat suitable for fish? What does conditions, Stream Teams often provide useful data in targeting areas that should be moni- it cost to make this water potable? tored more closely for impairments. The Missouri Stream Team Watershed Coalition has com- During drought, how long will my piled and reported monitoring data which demonstrates the importance of watershed family, school, cattle or crops have protection, preservation and enhancement enough water? by local communities. (image from http:// mstwc.org/who-we-are/vision-mission- Impacts to water quality and quantity goals/ ) are most critical to local communi- The Volunteer Water Quality Monitoring ties; however, impacts are often not Program is one of the most popular activi- realized until a dire situation arises ties of the Missouri Stream Team Program. There are 108 Stream Teams in the Sac as a result of poor water quality or river basin that work to supply the depart- quantity. Local awareness and in- ment with water quality data. volvement can lead to pollution pre- Nonpoint Source Grants (Clean Water 319 Grants) vention and reduction, water supply Over the last five years, the department has provided several watershed project grants to local sustainability, and can give commu- communities to improve water quality through reduction of nutrient and sediment loads and nities the upper hand in protecting, deposition, rehabilitation and removal of failing or neglected septic systems, watershed man- preserving and enhancing local agement planning, water quality monitoring, incentivized soil conservation practices, educa- water supplies for generations to tion/outreach efforts and other activities. These grant projects have included: the Fellows/ McDaniel/Fullbright Watershed Nutrient Reduction Project, the Little Sac Watershed Manage- come. ment Plan Project, Springfield/Greene County Urban Watershed Stewardship Project, the Ash- 2014 CONSERVATION er Creek 319 Project and the Little Sac Restoration and Improvement Project. PR AC TI CES Source Water Protection Program The Missouri Source Water Protection Program, administered through the Public Drinking Wa- ter Branch, is a voluntary program designed to provide tools, resources, and funding to com- munity public water systems to foster and promote wellhead and source water protection plan- ning. Participating public water systems include: Willard; Lamar; City of Springfield, Barton, Dade, Cedar, and Jasper Counties Consolidated Public Water Supply District #1; and Walnut Grove. Lamar, Willard, Fair Play and Springfield have received source water protection and/or wellhead protection grants. Abandoned Well Plugging Grants Animal Waste Management As part of Source Water Protection, the department offers grants to plug abandoned Grazing Management wells. Inactive wells can act as a direct conduit for pollutants to enter our water sources. Safely closing these wells is another layer of protection for pollution prevention. The City of Irrigation Management Willard has participated in the department’s well plugging grant program and received two Nutrient and Pest Management grants for the purpose of safely closing inactive wells. Sensitive Areas Soil and Water Conservation Cost Share Programs Sheet, Rill and Gully Erosion Soil and Water Conservation Districts set annual goals to address resource concerns. Practic- Woodland Erosion es specific to these concerns are funded and implemented to help districts meet their resource conservation goals. These practices conserve soil, which consequently improved water quali- ty by reducing sedimentation in our rivers, streams, and lakes. The chart on the left illustrates the number of practices implemented for each resource concern in the watershed in 2014. Grazing management, followed by sheet, rill, and gully erosion practices are the most popular in this watershed. 7 Sac River Watershed The State of Our Missouri Waters

Resources Education and Outreach Resources include: Contact Missouri Department of Natural Resources’ Our Misso uri Waters dnr.mo.gov/omw Information for Missouri Department of Natural Resources Financial Assistance Opportunities http://dnr.mo.gov/pubs/financial-asst-brochure-2014.pdf ) this Watershed Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/technical/ Southwest Region Watershed Coordinator - Missouri Rural Water Association (MRWA) http://www.moruralwater.org/training.php ; Gwenda Bassett http://www.moruralwater.org/tools.php ; http://www.moruralwater.org/dlcenter/ 2040 W. Woodland Missouri Public Utilities Alliance (MPUA) http://www.mpua.org/Training.php ; http:// Springfield, MO 65807 www.mpua.org/Untitled_Page_4.php 417-891-4300 EPA Region 7 Environmental Finance Center (EFC) http://webs.wichita.edu/? u=HUGOWALL&p=/Centers___Research/Environmental_Finance_Center/ Or visit the Web at dnr.mo.gov/omw Funding Resources include: Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nrcs/main/national/programs/financial/ Department of Agriculture Rural Development (USDA-RD) http:// www.rurdev.usda.gov/ProgramsAndOpportunities.html Missouri Department of Economic Development (DED) http://www.ded.mo.gov/BCS% 20Programs/BCSProgramDetails.aspx?BCSProgramID=10 ; http://www.ded.mo.gov/ Community/InfrastructureAssistance.aspx References 2010 Census data ( http://www.census.gov/ ) Center for Applied Research and Environmental Systems ( http://www.cares.missouri.edu/ ) Department of Natural Resources’ Groundwater Level Observation Well Network Page ( http:// dnr.mo.gov/env/wrc/groundwater/gwnetwork.htm ) Department of Natural Resources’ Missouri State Water Plan Series, Surface Water Re- sources of Missouri,1995, Groundwater Resources of Missouri, 1996. ( http://dnr.mo.gov/env/ wrc/statewaterplanMain.htm ) Department of Natural Resources’ Source Water Protection Program Page ( http://dnr.mo.gov/ env/wpp/pdwb/swpp.htm ) Department of Natural Resources’ Major Water Users Page ( http://dnr.mo.gov/env/wrc/mwu- forms.htm ) Missouri Stream Team Program Website, ( http://www.mostreamteam.org/aboutTeams.asp ) Missouri Stream Team Watershed Coalition Website, (http://mstwc.org/ ) Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics Consortium, 2011 and 2001 National Land Cover Data- base, ( http://www.mrlc.gov ) Missouri Climate Center, ( http://climate.missouri.edu/modata.php ) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Southwest Missouri Water Resource Study—Phase I. Sept. 2012 ( http://tristatewater.org/?page_id=12 ) Guinan, Pat, State Climatologist, MU Extension, Missouri Climate Center, ( http:// climate.missouri.edu/modata.php )

8